On 4/5/12 1:46 PM, "Greg Reddin" <gred...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> My half-baked thinking (and I don't really understand server-side issues) is
>> that you would assign a server to flex.apache.org at it would have enough
>> horsepower to host SVN and JIRA and a web-site. Infrastructure's job would
>> be narrowed to backups and maintenance of the servers and answering
>> questions, but administration would be mostly pushed to the podling.
>
> The problem with that approach is that source control and issue
> tracking are probably Apache's 2 most critical services. So there's an
> SLA associated with them (probably not an official SLA, but an
> expected one). Infra must be able to respond when svn or Jira goes
> belly up - or when a critical security issue pops up like happened a
> couple years ago. They also need to know the services are built and
> managed using best practices, etc. Imagine if each of the 150 or so
> projects had its own Jira. When a critical security bug comes up 150
> Jiras need to be patched ASAP.
That's a good point, but I would have to think that there are distributed
server installations at plenty of other places in the world where they have
ways of auto-updating the "world" quickly. My understanding is for clients,
IT departments have standards of what can and cannot be installed on a
desktop. Every time a security issue is found in Flash, those IT
departments have to push a player to every desktop.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
